P (PLP)
ZOOMAN AND MUHAMMAD JAN‑ — Versus KHUDAI RAHM KHAN
| Citation | P (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Bacon, J. C. |
| Parties | ZOOMAN AND MUHAMMAD JAN‑ — Versus KHUDAI RAHM KHAN |
| Primary Law | As regards "monthly wages" it is obvious that the meaning of the Act is employment at wages which do not exceed an average of Rs. 300 per month. Were this not the case, then every employer would avoid his obligations under the Act by employing daily labour. A. I R. 1938 Boni. p. 110 ; A. I. R. 1935 Mad. p. 721 (722) ; 1933 Rang. p. 208 followed. (p. 10), Workmen's Compensation Act (V111 of 1923), S. 2 (n) Workmen ----Must be casual worker and employed for purpose other than employer's business to merit exclusion from definition‑‑--- Monthly wages means employment at wages not exceeding Rs. 300 per month on average., To exclude a person from the definition of "workman" his work must be of a casual nature and ‑he must be employed otherwise than for the purposes of the employer's trade or business. Both these qualifications must be fulfilled. (p. 10) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: As regards "monthly wages" it is obvious that the meaning of the Act is employment at wages which do not exceed an average of Rs. 300 per month. Were this not the case, then every employer would avoid his obligations under the Act by employing daily labour. A. I R. 1938 Boni. p. 110 ; A. I. R. 1935 Mad. p. 721 (722) ; 1933 Rang. p. 208 followed. (p. 10), Workmen's Compensation Act (V111 of 1923), S. 2 (n) Workmen ----Must be casual worker and employed for purpose other than employer's business to merit exclusion from definition‑‑--- Monthly wages means employment at wages not exceeding Rs. 300 per month on average., To exclude a person from the definition of "workman" his work must be of a casual nature and ‑he must be employed otherwise than for the purposes of the employer's trade or business. Both these qualifications must be fulfilled. (p. 10) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Bacon, J. C..
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P (PLP) (ZOOMAN AND MUHAMMAD JAN‑ — Versus KHUDAI RAHM KHAN). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.